The Akron Legal News

Court rules Columbus attorney cannot represent alleged murderer and his accomplice

JESSICA SHAMBAUGH
Special to the Legal News
Published: March 11, 2014

A 10th District Court of Appeals panel ruled recently that a Columbus attorney cannot represent an alleged murderer because he represented the man’s girlfriend in a previous case.

Beau Stephenson and his girlfriend Cassandra Pack first had a run-in with the law in December 2012 when a traffic stop resulted in drug charges.

At the time, Stephenson was a passenger in his girlfriend’s car and police found a syringe in his possession.

They also found narcotics on Pack and she was ultimately charged with two felony counts of drug possession.

Following that brush with the law, Stephenson attempted to cooperate with investigating officers on other matters.

He became a confidential police informant and met with police several times, sometimes bringing Pack too.

Then in January 2013, Christopher Manley was shot and killed in his Columbus home.

Pack admitted to police that she had driven Stephenson to Manley’s home, where he robbed Manley of drugs and money and fatally shot him.

She said she then drove Stephenson to a hotel, got a room for him in her name and retrieved new clothes for him from their home.

Pack conceded that she helped her boyfriend dispose of the evidence from the shooting.

The Franklin County Grand Jury indicted Stephenson for aggravated robbery, kidnapping, aggravated murder, murder, attempted murder, all with firearm specifications, tampering with evidence, and having a weapon while under disability.

Columbus attorney Javier Armengau agreed to represent Stephenson in the case.

Prior to the start of trial, however, Armengau entered an appearance on behalf of Pack in her drug case.

The state moved to disqualify Armengau from Stephenson’s defense based on the dual representation.

The Franklin County Court of Common Pleas agreed that there was a strong likelihood of a conflict and granted the motion.

On appeal to the 10th District, Stephenson argued that he had a right to choose his representation and the trial court abused its discretion by dismissing Armengau.

“One aspect of the constitutional right to effective assistance of trial counsel is a presumptive right to employ counsel of the defendant’s choosing,” retired 10th District Judge John McCormac wrote for the court.

Upon review, however, the appellate judges held that a trial court must consider an attorney’s ability to render effective assistance of counsel because a failure to do so would only harm the defendant.

The judges maintained that dual representation had occurred but found that Armengau ceased representation of Pack and agreed to represent Stephenson.

Still, they found that some conflict can come from simultaneous representation when the interests of the parties are as different as they appear to be in the present case.

“While Stephenson now argues that attorney Armengau, in his representation of Pack, learned nothing from her that would not eventually be learned by the police in the course of investigation, this addresses only the peripheral aspects of the alleged conflict,” Judge McCormac wrote.

Judge McCormac also noted there was a substantial possibility, “if not a probability, that given Pack’s admitted conduct on the day of the murder she could be charged with murder on a complicity theory. Pack will likely be, at the least, a key witness for the prosecution in the case against Stephenson, where she will be subject to cross-examination by her own former counsel.”

The judges ruled that the potential for a conflict was too great and affirmed the trial court’s decision to dismiss Armengau as Stephenson’s representation.

Judges Julia Dorrian and Amy O’Grady concurred.

The case is cited State v. Stephenson, 2014-Ohio-670.

[Back]